Weigh In: Repeal all Public Accommodation Laws - Yes or No?

[Paperview]

Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?

Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?

 

[Eric7216]

Probably. Aren't they basically ineffective anyway and a business can refuse customers for a variety of reasons? Unless, of course, the customers are backed up by an effective dominating assertive thug-like groups. My brother has been refused entry into the nearest market on the grounds that he apparently offends some customers. He has some mental issues and questionable social/emotional intelligence. Never arrested for anything but his mental issues rub some the wrong way. So he is barred from the store. No other markets nearby and he doesn't drive so it is a significant problem for him. Yet precisely the same type of people outraged over a pizza place endorse his banning. Because his issues doesn't have the powerful lobby supporting him.

Accommodation should not be based on the size and power of your support group. It should be based on fairness and justice.

 

[Henrin]

According to liberals the free market responded to the Indiana law by rejecting discrimination.

Just sayin'.

 

[joG]

Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?

Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?

I am notquite clear what you mean in particular. There seem to be very different types of activities subsumed under that title.

 

[Summerwind]

Probably. Aren't they basically ineffective anyway and a business can refuse customers for a variety of reasons? Unless, of course, the customers are backed up by an effective dominating assertive thug-like groups. My brother has been refused entry into the nearest market on the grounds that he apparently offends some customers. He has some mental issues and questionable social/emotional intelligence. Never arrested for anything but his mental issues rub some the wrong way. So he is barred from the store. No other markets nearby and he doesn't drive so it is a significant problem for him. Yet precisely the same type of people outraged over a pizza place endorse his banning. Because his issues doesn't have the powerful lobby supporting him.

Accommodation should not be based on the size and power of your support group. It should be based on fairness and justice.

Actually I'm outraged that anyone is letting a store get away with treating your brother that way unless there's something more to the story you're conveniently leaving out, like no one has filed charges, but he has been a legitimate problem and either he hasn't got a minders, or his minders can't control him.

 

[Thrilla]

I find it preferable not to enumerate specific attributes that we cannot discriminate against( as it infers that other personal attributes are open to discriminate against)... but i'm not opposed to public accommodations laws in general.

"ability to pay" is really the only just form of discrimination a public firm should engage in, in terms of commerce....in the immortal words of James Hetfield... "Nothing else matters".

 

[ksu_aviator]

I vote no. BUT....there must be religious and conscientious objection exemptions to the laws.

 

[clownboy]

Like AA they are no longer needed. We have mobility and diversity like we've never had before.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?

Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?

Unfortunately, as long as there are some who exercise irrational bigotry, there will be the need for public accommodation laws.

 

[tres borrachos]

Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?

Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?

I voted yes. Anyone who thinks in the digital age that the market won't take care of things is naïve. These laws were desperately needed as women, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, the Irish, and so on were systematically subjected to discrimination and second class citizenship. That isn't the case anymore. The laws only cause problems, as evidenced by the last week.

 

[Eric7216]

Actually I'm outraged that anyone is letting a store get away with treating your brother that way unless there's something more to the story you're conveniently leaving out, like no one has filed charges, but he has been a legitimate problem and either he hasn't got a minders, or his minders can't control him.

Thank you for your response. My brother is 67 and lives a distance away and I see him infrequently. I understand that I don't know the whole story but I am not hiding anything. I believe that my brother may have "made advances" on a woman, perhaps a store clerk, and bought her a birthday gift. And perhaps she requested and got one of the 600,000 to 900,000 restraining orders issued every year. A Massachusetts study found 50% of restraining orders are bogus while another study found 63% are legitimate. They seem to be easy to get. 85% of restraining orders are on males. Few judges want to be the one who declines issuing a restraining order and a horrific crime happens.
If the Indiana pizza place was more devious and less honest perhaps one of the employees could have sworn out a harassment restraining order on a customer because he/she was offended by some non-criminal behavior of the customer. Perhaps things like Tourettes are commonly accepted while my brother's issues are less known or not easily labeled and categorized. And a class of people are denied public accommodation.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?

Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?

It really isn't possible to rationally reconcile general anti-discrimination laws with the freedom of association implied by the First Amendment, nor is it even possible to apply such laws in a fair and evenhanded manner compatible with the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause.

 

[a351]

Of course not. Even without discrimination as a result, the symbolic damage that such a move would cause would be sizable with nothing to speak of in the way of benefits.

 

[RabidAlpaca]

I vote no. BUT....there must be religious and conscientious objection exemptions to the laws.

Why? If Bob's religion says black people are evil why should he be able to refuse service to them? Why are personal views suddenly holy and sacred when you add an arbitrary "religious" title to it?

It really isn't possible to rationally reconcile general anti-discrimination laws with the freedom of association implied by the First Amendment, nor is it even possible to apply such laws in a fair and evenhanded manner compatible with the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause.

It's pretty easy to not give a **** about public accommodation laws when you're a white male christian who's never faced it. If you were denied service in every restaurant and store you went to because of your religious beliefs you would cry harder than anyone.

Like AA they are no longer needed. We have mobility and diversity like we've never had before.

You really do live in a fantasy world if you think discrimination no longer exists. What a sheltered life you live. Not every city has the selection of New York City. It wouldn't be hard for the handful of business owners in a very small town to effectively make it impossible for minorities to live there.

 

[Master PO]

Why? If Bob's religion says black people are evil why should he be able to refuse service to them? Why are personal views suddenly holy and sacred when you add an arbitrary "religious" title to it?

equally under law,..... not equally by law.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Religion is a private matter. Individuals can have whatever religious beliefs they wish.

Business is a public matter. Businesses that are open to the public must serve the public.

 

[Helix]

no. we stopped letting store owners kick out black people, and it was a change for the better and a long time coming. they shouldn't be allowed to kick out gays, either.

 

[Thrilla]

no. we stopped letting store owners kick out black people, and it was a change for the better and a long time coming. they shouldn't be allowed to kick out gays, either.

we've left plenty of room for discrimination in our laws... and plenty of workarounds.
we can legally kick people out over their politics, or their dress , or their tastes, their behavior... and a whole host of things that have little to do with commerce.

so yeah, as usual , our law have good intentions , but are flawed ..... that's what we get by having demographic based agendas instead of actually being interested in properly formulated laws.

 

[Helix]

we've left plenty of room for discrimination in our laws... and plenty of workarounds.
we can legally kick people out over their politics, or their dress , or their tastes, their behavior... and a whole host of things that have little to do with commerce.

so yeah, as usual , our law have good intentions , but are flawed ..... that's what we get by having demographic based agendas instead of actually being interested in properly formulated laws.

yeah, but the thing is this : sexual identity is innate. all of that other stuff can be changed via choice. race and sexual identity can't.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Religion is a private matter. Individuals can have whatever religious beliefs they wish.

Business is a public matter. Businesses that are open to the public must serve the public.

So, you would have all religious people act as hypocrites, paying only lip service to the standards thereof, while politely acting in public against these standards?

 

[jaeger19]

I voted yes. Anyone who thinks in the digital age that the market won't take care of things is naïve. These laws were desperately needed as women, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, the Irish, and so on were systematically subjected to discrimination and second class citizenship. That isn't the case anymore. The laws only cause problems, as evidenced by the last week.

and it still happens... racism is not dead.

 

[Lutherf]

I don't have a problem with the principle of public accommodation laws but there are definitely issues with how they are applied and how they are manipulated by certain groups.

 

[jaeger19]

So, you would have all religious people act as hypocrites, paying only lip service to the standards thereof, while politely acting in public against these standards?

I am just curious.. but how does making a cake for a gay person "pay lip service" to the standards of Christianity. Being a Christian.. I would like to understand how judging others and discrimination is my proper duty as a Christian.

 

[Thrilla]

yeah, but the thing is this : sexual identity is innate. all of that other stuff can be changed via choice. race and sexual identity can't.

the point is that if we are going to disallow discrimination in public retail commerce, we can narrow it down to simply "ability to pay" and be done with all the bull****..... otherwise, we're just leaving potential loopholes

 

[jaeger19]

the point is that if we are going to disallow discrimination in public retail commerce, we can narrow it down to simply "ability to pay" and be done with all the bull****..... otherwise, we're just leaving potential loopholes

The problem is the world doesn't work that way. If a women comes into our offices and is obviously inebriated.. I should not have to treat her.

Or I shouldn't have to hire a secretary or nurse that has tattoos of a penis on his or her face.